2004 Jaguar XJ vs. 2002 MCC Crossblade

To start off, 2004 Jaguar XJ is newer by 2 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 4,195 cc (8 cylinders), 2004 Jaguar XJ is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Jaguar XJ (294 HP) has 224 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Jaguar XJ should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Jaguar XJ weights approximately 970 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2004 Jaguar XJ (411 Nm) has 309 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm). This means 2004 Jaguar XJ will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 MCC Crossblade. 2004 Jaguar XJ has automatic transmission and 2002 MCC Crossblade has manual transmission. 2002 MCC Crossblade will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2004 Jaguar XJ will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: